"Bias" of some members towards headphone measurements?

[terryforsythe]

"Measurements are extremely important" to some people. But completely unnecessary to assemble a good hifi system.

That depends on perspective.

I read many amplifier reviews published by Amir, and followed his measurement data in making my amplifier selections. It probably saved me a lot of money. I got very good amplifiers at what I consider to be very good prices given their performance. They sound extremely good.

Also, on my systems, the sound quality much improved by measuring the frequency responses at my listening positions and tuning them with DSP to match my target frequency response curve. Playing with speaker locations and toe-in also helped quite a bit.

Lastly, I selected my speakers for my office based on the measurements Erin posted at Erin's Audio Corner. Based on that measurement data, I pretty much knew ahead of time what the speakers were going to sound like. They sound just as I had expected.

 

[akamatsu]

That rather depends upon your definition of ‘good’.
Keith

More music. I find it rather easy to hear better resolution of one system over another. That is, if there really is a difference. It has to be obvious.

Good to see you Keith,
Michael

 

[markanini]

What people like in transducers is as varied as what people like in food.

Sorry to respond to a single sentence, but equally, some transducer characteristics are acquired tastes, people learn to like something based on socialization factors. Audiophile communities would be the primary segment of listeners with acquired tastes. I know many who go for a frequency balance that's recessed in the lows and upper mids, it's a gimmick that enhances spatial perception but to most listeners, me included, it not wanted and it gets tired how some assume it's normal to have a skewed frequency balance.

 

[SSS]

Not using headphone much my selection criteria was simple. It must resolve music in fine details without distortion and the sound of my favourite music must pleasing me. Due to the kind of music I prefer a good deep bass response. I don't care about target curves, Harman or others. These might be a statistical average but not a key for me. But I admit that for development and production some kind of repeatable measurments are necessary.

 

[Keith_W]

I worry about being misunderstood on this one. I do not believe in magic.
But while the ASR community is partly a bastion against snake oil and subjectivism, I think some ASR users tend to overrate the meaningfulness of measurable data when it comes to headphones. (Maybe this also goes for other audio devices, but I almost only read the headphone topics here.)

Oh, I completely agree! Where is @Sean Olive when you need him?

The only interpretable range on a headphone measurement is between 300Hz - 3kHz. Above 3kHz, the HRTF of the test dummy may deviate from your individual HRTF. Below 300Hz, issues with obtaining an adequate seal, headphone placement, sound leakage, etc. may prevent obtaining a meaningful measurement. This does not mean they should be ignored, but it does mean that the measurement is likely to deviate from the actual headphone output by a few dB. Amir posts a disclaimer with every headphone review that headphone measurements are not exact. I wish more members would pay attention to his disclaimer.

Then there is the question as to whether you like the Harman curve or not. A bit more nuance is required here - the Harman curve is a preference study, and their own data showed 3 groups of preferences - those who liked the Harman curve as it is (about 2/3), and the remaining 1/3 or so were evenly split between those who liked less bass (mostly older listeners and women), and those who liked more bass (mostly younger men).

So I don't complain if the measurements show less bass because (1) it could be an issue with the measurement, and (2) some people will prefer it anyway.

Then there are designers like Axel Grell (designer of the Sennheiser HD800/HD800S) who deliberately designs with less bass. Egregiously less bass. Yet his headphones are still recommended by Amir. I can't figure this one out.

 

[markanini]

Oh, I completely agree! Where is @Sean Olive when you need him?

The only interpretable range on a headphone measurement is between 300Hz - 3kHz. Above 3kHz, the HRTF of the test dummy may deviate from your individual HRTF. Below 300Hz, issues with obtaining an adequate seal, headphone placement, sound leakage, etc. may prevent obtaining a meaningful measurement. This does not mean they should be ignored, but it does mean that the measurement is likely to deviate from the actual headphone output by a few dB. Amir posts a disclaimer with every headphone review that headphone measurements are not exact. I wish more members would pay attention to his disclaimer.

Then there is the question as to whether you like the Harman curve or not. A bit more nuance is required here - the Harman curve is a preference study, and their own data showed 3 groups of preferences - those who liked the Harman curve as it is (about 2/3), and the remaining 1/3 or so were evenly split between those who liked less bass (mostly older listeners and women), and those who liked more bass (mostly younger men).

So I don't complain if the measurements show less bass because (1) it could be an issue with the measurement, and (2) some people will prefer it anyway.

Then there are designers like Axel Grell (designer of the Sennheiser HD800/HD800S) who deliberately designs with less bass. Egregiously less bass. Yet his headphones are still recommended by Amir. I can't figure this one out.

Excellent an essential information. I'm black pilled enough at this point to think that the issue will not go away. Some people only operate on a single data point and have no desire to learn, including some ASR members with thousands of accumulated messages.

But maybe an added disclaimer that sums up the key points in Amirs great video would help those that are open to learn.

 

[amirm]

I had disclaimers in HP reviews but don't anymore hoping people have learned the points enclosed in it.

 

[Soria Moria]

I had disclaimers in HP reviews but don't anymore hoping people have learned the points enclosed in it.

Adding them back could probably be nice since there are always new people coming and reading them and they won't have any earlier reviews to go off on.

 

[kemmler3D]

I do think a few people in this thread have missed a key point when it comes to IEM measurements in particular: The measurements and targets show how well an IEM complies with a given target on a headphone jig.

However, everyone's ear canals are shaped differently, which affects the FR at your eardrum, and the measurements can't fully account for this. So unlike with speakers, the measurements don't tell you exactly what someone is going to hear.

The Harman curve is arguably the best target out there according to the data, but a target curve for IEMs is not as definitive as it is with speakers. You may still need EQ or to go on a long quest for your perfect IEM. The circle of confusion is harder to close.

 

[solderdude]

I worry about being misunderstood on this one. I do not believe in magic.

I don't either.

But while the ASR community is partly a bastion against snake oil and subjectivism, I think some ASR users tend to overrate the meaningfulness of measurable data when it comes to headphones. (Maybe this also goes for other audio devices, but I almost only read the headphone topics here.)

As Amir already has stated headphone measurements, and in a lesser way speaker measurements are not the be all end all and are indicative at best.
Not to mention product variances, pad conditions ... etc.

a) Most of us agree that the frequency response is the most important parameter. But it is all about the frequency response in your ear, not on some measurement rig (you cannot know it exactly in beforehand). I have quite a few IEMs and Over-Ears, and when I tune them to Harman, they all sound different - some quite significantly - as they interact with my ear in a different way (also HRTF, hair, glasses etc.). Soundstage also seems a bit random.

Not only do they interact differently on human heads there are also differences between test fixtures and targets.

Measurements (when performed correctly) only conform to the standard it is measured to and quite likely this is not the same as someone's head.

So ... indicative at best and 'exact' EQ based on some measurement (or an average of measurements) thus also is inaccurate.

b) The Harman Target is a very helpful standard, but it is not the perfect target for everyone.

No it isn't a perfect target for all and this is clearly stated by Dr. Olive as well. It is a guideline that applies to the majority of people.

But here's the thing. When making measurements it is good to know there is a standard and all headphones measured on the same standard fixture under the same circumstances should give comparable measurements. It is handy to have a target too (that helps translate measured FR to perceived FR).
The Harman target, being confirmed to suit the majority of listeners, is a good starting point.

c) Distortion is important if it exceeds a certain amount. But many people completely overestimate how well they can hear it. Besides, it is irrelevant if a headphone has high distortion on 114dbspl if you never listen to it at 114dbspl anyway.

Yep... but 114dB measurements can show driver issues and 114dB peaks in subbass aren't really loud.

So basically, my point is that, while all this data surely is more helpful than highly subjective reviews, our ears still are not measurement rigs. The things you hear come from an interaction between headphone and your ear, and not everything which is measurable does really influence your listening experience.

Yep, and once you realize you can look at headphone measurements being only indicative and not 'facts' when on your head.

- If a headphone does exactly hit the Harman target that doesnt mean that it will sound perfect to you (or that there is something wrong with your ear if it does not sound perfect to you).
- You probably cannot hear in a blind test if a headphone has less distortion unless one of them performs badly.
- If you like a headphone which was reviewed with average/mediocre results, you were not necessarily fooled. It is not necessarily a good idea to buy a "better" headphone if you didnt feel something was wrong before you read the review.

Those are some of the conclusions one can draw when knowing headphone measurements are only indicative at best.
One can use the measurements to base EQ on (as a starting point) and see if there are any red flags popping up in performance.

 

[Verig]

There's some bias towards "giant killers", wanting it all for very affordable price and having very limited view of product pros and cons. This point of view often misses ergonomics, looks, ease of use, product support... Especially with headphones this is really a trap. Room correction is another big one in this regard.
But I must say there seems to be a lot less of this than some years ago.

 

[Aerith Gainsborough]

a) Most of us agree that the frequency response is the most important parameter. But it is all about the frequency response in your ear, not on some measurement rig (you cannot know it exactly in beforehand). I have quite a few IEMs and Over-Ears, and when I tune them to Harman, they all sound different - some quite significantly - as they interact with my ear in a different way (also HRTF, hair, glasses etc.). Soundstage also seems a bit random.
b) The Harman Target is a very helpful standard, but it is not the perfect target for everyone.
c) Distortion is important if it exceeds a certain amount. But many people completely overestimate how well they can hear it. Besides, it is irrelevant if a headphone has high distortion on 114dbspl if you never listen to it at 114dbspl anyway.

a) Correct, that's why we know that reviews measure a baseline for comparison purposes. FR in cans is, for the most part, just an indicator on how much PEQ you need to reach your personal target of preference (talking about well designed stuff, obviously measurements easily weed out the duds). Though in terms of cans, what is super important is how the FR changes with amplifier impedance. With a headphone like my Focal Clear this is VERY noticeable. Au natural, the RME sounds very cold. The 35 Ohm output impedance headamp of my old soundcard added a nice touch of warmth (elevated bass response, this was measurable). Solution: PEQ on the RME to mimic the sound I like.

b) Correct, Harman is a great baseline that applies to a lot of listeners but not all. Personally I prefer less bass. The guys that made the Harman target actually noted in their study that they had a few listeners that like less/more bass, so it's not so out of the ordinary.

c) Distortion is a problem when it becomes audible. 114dB is pretty easy to reach with headphones, far easier compared to speakers because subjectively it sounds quieter. What is audible is different from person to person, especially dependent on training. Lower is always better, since it provides more breathing room before you may run into scenarios where it is audible. E.g.: my Focal Clear sounds completely clean... until I hit maximum excursion. *yikes* On my DT880 I can hear distortion gradually increase. Both reach pretty much the same perceived volume before they fall apart (and my ears ring as well :'D).

To me, your post doesn't question measurements as such but rather people's abilities to put them into the context of their own preferences / situation. If I know what I like, I can search for other equipment that shares a similar Frequency response. Hit my preference closely enough and I might not even need PEQ capable devices to enjoy the sound, which is sometimes a huge boon. E.g.: I enjoy my Focal Clear plugged into my TV's headphone out far more than my DT-880. Most likely due to it's reaction to a higher amp impedance.

TLDR: measurement are a fantastic starting point but one needs to interpret them through the subjective lens (preference/available equipment/desired use) to get the most out of them.

 

[Miguelón]

Perhaps I have not as good ears as I thought some months ago (before joining ASR), also measurements saved me a lot of money.

I can be very impressed to some setup, even during some hours but finally at some days of listening I became tired of any sound coloration (beyond a certain threshold, about 3 dB perhaps). This caused me to return and rebuy many monitors (I think I’m on the “black list “ of Thomann )

Finally I kept the flattest ones; despite were not very impressive to me at first glance.

So measurements are helpful to me as I cannot recognize easily a good sound but I appreciate not be tired and listening to all instruments as possible. I enjoy more the music and not capture my attention to the speakers.

But I think measurements are not all, because probably sensorial threshold varies on frequencies from one people to another and may have psychoacousitcal preferences too. So a combinations of both is the happy medium to me, possibly to many others

 

[Mr Swing King]

I like my measurements. Objective numbers say way more than any subjective review imho.
Finding out what works for you is still highly subjective though. Just because ASR recommends X thing doesn’t necessarily mean that it tickles my fancy.

 

[Basic Channel]

At least some users here like to think that soundstage doesn't exist. I prefer the Rtings approach, because they are trying to measure it; with more or less success.

Are you suggesting there are users who believe there actually is a centre speaker? Or they only hear L and R and not in stereo? I am genuinely not sure what you mean, there is a massive poll thread about how you hear soundstage.

 

[Miguelón]

Are you suggesting there are users who believe there actually is a centre speaker? Or they only hear L and R and not in stereo? I am genuinely not sure what you mean, there is a massive poll thread about how you hear soundstage.

“Sound location” agnosticism is a new level of skepticism new for me…

 

[markanini]

“Sound location” agnosticism is a new level of skepticism new for me…

If true many mixing engineers are going out if business.

 

[InfiniteJester]

Ha! Reductio ad absurdum, always funny.

This is the reason why we need measurements:

How many years in the future is the Chinese industry?

 

[Basic Channel]

Ha! Reductio ad absurdum, always funny.

What is redutcio ad absurdum exactly?

 

[muza_1]

Ha! Reductio ad absurdum, always funny.

This is the reason why we need measurements:

View attachment 377165

How many years in the future is the Chinese industry?

At least most Chinese brands despite all the bullshit they put the measurements on the marketing and/or package (and lots of them are accurate!!).
On the bright side marketing like this, all flowery bullshit and no measurements, just announce or rather shouts at you that you are being conned.

...Or maybe I'm just a spiritless person that doesn't know any better?